On Nov 7, 12:34=A0pm, John W. Higgins <wish... / gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd rather have the efficient implementation that one can easily make sta=
ble
> by using the secondary comparison (as you can easily do in this case) tha=
n
> an inefficient version that really accomplishes nothing that the efficien=
t
> version cannot.

I'd rather have a stable and efficient sort.  If Python can do it,
then there's no excuse for Ruby.